LEGO statement regarding 75345 501st Clone Troopers Battle Pack

They create dozens of new accessory pieces for themes like ninjago and monkie kid every year but they couldn't just make one new visor piece that would have avoided this issue completely?

@ELH2806 said:
"They create dozens of new accessory pieces for ninjago and monkie kid every year but they couldn't just make one new visor piece that would have avoided this issue completely? "

Clearly not!

One of the issues with using CGI.

Not bothered by this in the slightest. Neither the position of the hole, nor the render error.

Life is too short to be worrying over things like this, IMHO.

Some people care wayyyyyyy to much

I see most comments down here are about how "people care too much about such an insignificant matter", or how others simply don't care.

As quite a hardcore Lego Star wars collector, I will say that the rangefinder placement on the helmet bothers a lot of fans, myself included. The final product looks wrong. However, I wouldn't let it detract from the set. Doesn't mean I justify it though, and a new mould for the visor along with a new visor piece to accompany it would have been ideal. After all, the rangefinder/visor attachments we have nowadays originate from about 2008 and I think it's due for an update.

It does highlight one of the issues of computer generated images versus physical photography.
While renders speed up 5he time to market by doing stuff in parallel, mistakes like this can happen.
I guess it's all a trade off, and requires a little more care in closing the quality loop on stuff like this.
Ultimately, it's a minor issue here but Care need to prevent it becoming a bigger one.

@ELH2806 said:
"They create dozens of new accessory pieces for themes like ninjago and monkie kid every year but they couldn't just make one new visor piece that would have avoided this issue completely? "

As somebody that really likes to customize their clones, I'd much rather have the helmets as they are now and have the rangefinders sit slightly too high than have helmets molded for each specific helmet shape.

Never ceases to amaze me, how adult men can get angry by inaccuracies in Star Wars / Marvel children's toys compared to source material.

Bit disappointing they only acknowledged it and didn't even apologise to fans about it. I know the hardcore star wars fans were already upset about the incorrect position and I'd say some fans might have been misled with the box art that they fixed it.

Personally I don't really care and find it funny they got it "correct" in the render. But its a slap in the face to the hardcore fans

I'm more annoyed that Lego stopped including leg capes for Clones cos they already exist.

Literally unplayable

I have a LEGO Star Wars comicbook where the TIE Fighters fly backwards and shoot lasers from their twin ion engines. This made it all the way to print and public release.
Mistakes happen.

They can make 3D renders that looks perfectly real, but the background looks like it's been slapped on by a 10 years old kid on his first Photoshop lesson.

Welp, it looks like I'll be adding the statement to my product description for those types that want to ridiculously claim "item not as pictured" and seek financial redress.

What is this even all about? Is it about that little blue thing that seeemd to have moved up a few millimeters? If so...........wow, some people desperately need to get a life.

For those who are struggling:-

"Star Wars" is a work of fiction.
LEGO is a plastic toy.
There are FAR more important things in life to get upset about.

I hope that helps.

Storm in a tea cup. Mountains out of molehills. Common sense dictates that the render was inaccurate from the outset. I noticed the error and thought nothing of it.

Really doesn’t warrant any fuss whatsoever

"You want to go home and rethink your life"

The error looks a bit janky but you're one of two options, a child buying this to play with it and not care, or an adult to display them and barely touch them. Neither of them warrant this level of fuss imo

I didn't even notice it. Far more important things to worry about, tbh.

@Judgeguy said:
"Not bothered by this in the slightest. Neither the position of the hole, nor the render error."

Agree. Hate seeing them trying to placate the whiners.

@andygott said:
" @Judgeguy said:
"Not bothered by this in the slightest. Neither the position of the hole, nor the render error."

Agree. Hate seeing them trying to placate the whiners.
"

I do like that they don't actually apologise for the 'error'. You can imagine the sighing and eye-rolling that went on as they published this statement.

Ok so the range finder is the stick thing. Looking at the render, it seems pretty obvious that it has an additional hole beneath the one for the visor. The bump for it is present on the other helmets, and on the real ones it is just a bump. So either that was planned as a hole but did not make it, or the render designer simply thought it would be.

Still, this is a statement, and maybe half an explanation, but something of an apology should have been added. I personally don't care about it, but it clearly is important to some.

Dremel press and a tiny vice.

I bet that could fix the issue. A woman named Julia used just such a setup to make 1x1 plates (round and square) with holes through the middle of them - years before the official LEGO.

We can all get creative.

Render mistakes happen ALL THE TIME (bending, impossible rotations, misplaced pieces), in pretty much all the product lines. Really no need to give a statement on this specific one. But maybe LEGO takes notes and tries to improve in that regard.

If only they would regard more serious issues such as the atrocious mold marks on the 1x1 clip (plate and tile)

@Torrent_Studios said:
"I see most comments down here are about how "people care too much about such an insignificant matter", or how others simply don't care.

As quite a hardcore Lego Star wars collector, I will say that the rangefinder placement on the helmet bothers a lot of fans, myself included. The final product looks wrong. However, I wouldn't let it detract from the set. Doesn't mean I justify it though, and a new mould for the visor along with a new visor piece to accompany it would have been ideal. After all, the rangefinder/visor attachments we have nowadays originate from about 2008 and I think it's due for an update."

They have scoops for hands, how accurate does this toy need to be?

Imagine the uproar if, instead of the location of the rangefinder being wrong, it was colored white...

I care a lot more about the crappy printed one-sided kamas. Can't we get cloth, plastic, or dual-molded legs?

While not a massive problem for me (and paying no mind to the conspiracy theories that TLG did this on purpose) the amount of condescending comments above does pose a more serious problem.

There are - of course - an almost indefinite amount of bigger problems plaguing the world we live in than misplaced rangefinders, but that stance could be applied to reduce the perceived importance of ALL Lego issues. If someone wants to care deeply about this particular thing, why can't we just let them do so and not pose endless amounts of disparaging comments toward those who are annoyed by this particular one?

I’ve read all the comments down to here and I still couldn’t care less.

@Zrath said:
"I have a LEGO Star Wars comicbook where the TIE Fighters fly backwards and shoot lasers from their twin ion engines."

Must be piloted by Minions using fart blasters.

For me the issue isn't the placement of the range finder (not a fan, but beside the point) but the steady decline in the quality of the products Lego has been putting out the last several years. While the box art isn't so egregious, it acts as an example of things I have been less than happy about with the Lego as of late.

When I pay money for something, I expect to receive it as advertised. For instance, when I have purchased parts on Bricklink that do not come as described, I will always contact the seller and the seller always makes it right. Why is Lego not held to this same standard? We pay a lot of money for their product!

So while a mistakes are obviously a part of being a human, to me the oversight just shows that the quality of the Lego brand has in fact declined since I came out of my dark ages almost 10 years ago now, all the while prices have continued to increase.

Just sayin.

I'm a huge SW LEGO fan/collector and I'm not bother the slightest by this "error".

LEGO minifigures are LEGO representations of in universe characters. They are not copies of those characters. If they were, they would not have that shape, anti-studs under their feet, clips as hands, etc.

I have a simple message to anyone who actually cares about this.

IT IS A TOY GET OVER IT.

Of course ideally they’d have gotten the rendering closer to the final product, but it really isn’t terribly important, and while years of existence in this world have taught me there are people who will complain about anything, I’m still kind of gobsmacked there are people who were genuinely upset by this.

I don't even see the problem and I don't even put the helmet accessories on, tend to get in the way while playing.

Awful lot of people taking their precious time away from "the important things" to comment on other people's toy issues on a toy fansite. Looks pretty funny to me.

This would look a lot better with a simple "sorry", instead of a bloated "yes, it is indeed different".

Interesting statement from Lego . . . they don't apologize or even hint at being sorry for the mistake.

Does the incorrect render bother me? No.
Does the hypocrisy of toy fans on a toy site mocking folks for voicing toy concerns bother me? Yes.

If I were a betting man, I’d bet you all have had some strong takes on previous non-real world LEGO concerns…

I don’t care about Star Wars or Lego Star Wars but I think the fans are justified in their complaints and absolutely should hold Lego accountable so the final product is as accurate to the source material as possible.

People on here saying grow up or that it is just a toy obviously like toys enough to be commenting on a discussion post about toys on a toy website.

Crazy that this mishap gets an official statement while recurring quality control issues go on for years without acknowledgement. That does say a lot about LEGO, but I can't help but draw conclusions about the vocal Star Wars community, as well.

@Torrent_Studios said:
"I see most comments down here are about how "people care too much about such an insignificant matter", or how others simply don't care.

As quite a hardcore Lego Star wars collector, I will say that the rangefinder placement on the helmet bothers a lot of fans, myself included. The final product looks wrong. However, I wouldn't let it detract from the set. Doesn't mean I justify it though, and a new mould for the visor along with a new visor piece to accompany it would have been ideal. After all, the rangefinder/visor attachments we have nowadays originate from about 2008 and I think it's due for an update."

Nobody seems to be bothered by the square feet or wide bodies though. Strange.

I get that people have preferences and are frustrated by the lack of seemingly simple fixes that would raise the value of whatever is drawing their ire. My finger may not be exactly "on the pulse" of the LEGO fan community at large, and I hate to generalize, but a certain perspective of vocal clone fans is definitely solidifying. And it's not too endearing.

At least it gave the Star Wars fans something to complain about on the internet, which seems to be the preferred pastime of Star Wars fans.

The placement of the range finder is mildly disappointing.

But for me the main problem is this is now a recurring pattern in the Star Wars line that points to internal departments either not collaborating closely enough, or product finalizations being rushed, or quality controls slipping

The effects are small but they are symptomatic of problems that can grow and spread, costing the company money and ultimately impacting the experience of customers down the line.

And we should all want LEGO to be the best it can be for all of us, right?

First world problem

@leviness said:
"First world problem"

First world discussion

@Judgeguy said:
"Not bothered by this in the slightest. Neither the position of the hole, nor the render error."

My thoughts too. I hopped onto the site this morning, read the article, and thought "-this- is what we're caring about these days?"

Do I like that you can now add visors and range finders to phase II helmets? Yes, do I wish that the holes were correctly placed like on phase I troopers? Yes. Am I going to let that drive me crazy? No!

As someone who worked in product development, this is completely understandable. It sounds like the final element design was dictated by engineering concerns (physical placement, manufacturability, ability to actually assemble) - as it should be. LEGO’s plastic engineers shouldn’t allow poorly engineered designs, and sometimes engineering has to come before aesthetics.

Graphics teams have to do things in parallel, and keeping everything version-synced is much harder than you’d think.

With how many LEGO sets come out each year, it’s completely understandable that some mistakes would happen, even with the best of intentions and quality control. That’s just the statistical reality. Fortunately, this isn’t a serious design error or structural error or omission… it’s literally just a render version control error equating to a few pixels. In the grand scheme of things, I think it’s forgivable for a company the size of LEGO to have a couple of these things happen.

People have every right to be upset, and I’m sorry that so many people are… but then, Star Wars fans are probably used to that feeling ;) I say that with love, as a fan myself <3

Years ago, the LEGO Club Magazine had a scene of Knights Kingdom II sets - I believe it was along enough ago that it had to be real pieces, not a render. In the photo, they included Danju on a horse with a matching headcover, even though that piece was never released in purple. Somewhere, out there, is at least one or a piece in a color that was never released. It really bothered me as a kid, so much that I wrote to LEGO to ask if they were going to release that part in a future set.

Of course, it makes sense that LEGO would have prototype parts that aren’t released. Renders are just the modern version, for better or worse (:

@Vindicare said:
"So if I’m seeing things right, the render has the rangefinder slightly lower? Is that really a thing that people need to get bothered by enough to contact LEGO? It’s in the correct spot on the minifig. "

Actually, it's in the correct place on the render, not on the minifig. It would not be an issue otherwise. Either way, it's not something anyone should be worked up about.

I'm way more concerned by the errorsthere are on seemingly every single USC plaque. So much so that when there's none, reviewers comment upon it.

I'm more upset that my assembled rifle doesn't shoot lasers out of it like in the box art.

Is this Clone Fans AGAIN?

The same minority that urged the majority into voting for the UCS gunship on the ONE occasion when fans had a chance to decide a UCS... that turned out to be too big for anyone's house, and then had that same minority complaining about minifigures?
I suspect that lot won't be happy with anything LEGO do.

I love Star Wars, and I love Star Wars LEGO, but damn if the fans of Star Wars LEGO aren't infuriating sometimes.

Someone above said:
"slap in the face"
Come on. Really? Like, really??

@redblurr said:
"IT IS A TOY GET OVER IT."
This.

@bananaworld said:
"
Is this Clone Fans AGAIN?

The same minority that urged the majority into voting for the UCS gunship on the ONE occasion when fans had a chance to decide a UCS... that turned out to be too big for anyone's house, and then had that same minority complaining about minifigures?
I suspect that lot won't be happy with anything LEGO do.
"
To be fair, nobody forced anyone to vote for Gunship, it's not minifig-scale as most people expected, the choice for minifigures is questionable (but that's just me) and the "all people remember about the pilot is some yellow markings" comment from the designer was unnecessary and just added fuel to the fire.
SW fans tend to exaggerate, yes, but ignoring or dismissing genuine issues (even if they aren't that big) because "it's just SW fans whining again" is a bizzare stance too.

" @sipuss said:
SW fans tend to exaggerate, yes, but ignoring or dismissing genuine issues (even if they aren't that big) because "it's just SW fans whining again" is a bizzare stance too."

I don't know. I'm an OG Star Wars fan in the sense that I was there when it hit (not in the sense that I have an encyclopedic knowledge of lore from every source of Star Wars content ever created - what's often referred to as a "true fan"). Star Wars fandom wears me the F out these days. Admittedly, that stance on fandom does not apply to Star Wars exclusively.

The versatility of Lego parts is their whole appeal. That Lego bricks can be used to make literally anything is what makes them Lego. The current placement of the range finder is inaccurate but it enables the part to connect to the visor and other accessories. Lego will never be (and should not be) so accurate that it loses its appeal. In my mind if these inaccuracies bother a star wars collector, they should focus on a more authentic replication in a toy (maybe black series).

Clone troopers also do not have square legs and studs on their heads.

After 35 years of building Lego, I am almost disappointed about the number of new parts and specialized parts designed recently to make a product more accurate and less like Lego.

All of these 'haters' down here telling us Star Wars fans to "get over it", that there's "nothing to fuss over". We're fans of the products LEGO makes. We just want it to look a little better than what LEGO's given us.

We're not making a fuss out of nothing; even LEGO themselves have acknowledged that there has in fact been an error on the box art.

I don't speak for all of us but I would say that beyond the surface of the issue, most of us can enjoy the set without any issues. We aren't attacking LEGO for this mistake. But this also isn't LEGO's first mistake either, and I can agree with some other commentors about how LEGO's quality has been steadily going down.

About those people who go "clone troopers don't have the physique of lego minifigures", we aren't asking for that kind of thing. There is a charm to the proportions of LEGO minifigures and we like that. We also understand LEGO's difficulty in that they can't please absolutely everyone, and at the end of the day their target market is young children who won't give a damn about how a piece looks wonky on the set they're buying.

But the fact that the error exists is a little concerning. Does no one give new sets a once-over before releasing them?

I doubt people would care as much if folks like MandRProductions weren’t screaming “FALSE ADVERTISING” from the rooftops. Most of these people wouldn’t know false advertising if it slapped them in the face. If you cared about tiny details on the box art THAT much, you wouldn’t buy the products. But you by them in multiples. You claim you just want things to be accurate but when LEGO puts inaccurate figures in sets like the UCS AT-AT and the TIE Bomber all of you fall head over heels in support of LEGO.

Why has nobody ever made this big of a stink over other much bigger issues? LEGO hasn’t been able to print light colours on dark pieces for about a decade now and nobody is revolting over that.

@Torrent_Studios said:
"But the fact that the error exists is a little concerning. Does no one give new sets a once-over before releasing them?"
Pretty sure they do. But when you're running a company this big, some mistakes are inevitable, some minor details will be overlooked. Nobody's perfect.

And I don't even mind when people who notice talk about. I do that myself all the time. Like with the Bugatti Bolide, where clearly a picture of an early prototype ended up on the back of the box. But I don't expect an official statement let alone apologies from Lego for that.

And I don't even think of this as a quality issue. Those are the result of cutting corners, intentionally putting profit above quality. Like with color inconsistenties, poor print quality or scratched pieces. That's something very different than a tiny unintentional error that anyone but the most hardcore SW fans would probably never even notice.

The thing that baffles me though was that apparently Lego felt the need to make a statement about it. If they would do that for every little error they make they better start hiring a bunch of people for that. And Brickset could start a new daily series for it.

And then there are some people that think this isn't enough. Who demand an official apology from Lego. It's probably a good thing we can't use emoji's here, because no amount of facepalms would ever suffice....

Yay I'm happy for you guys.

Or

Sorry guys that sucks.

I dunno man I don't have time to read all these comments.

@borischm said:
"I agree with those that say it’s not that important. I can buy poorly designed and inaccurate products from any number of manufacturers. Whether I choose to do so, that is a different story. Ultimately it’s a story of what “could have been” and the feeling of loss that comes with it. Things like this make tend to snap me back to reality and ponder why I choose to spend my time with this product at all. A permanent entry back into the dark ages might just be ok. "

As a huge LEGO Star Wars fan and someone with actual OCD and extreme attention to detail, I feel like this has been massively blown out of proportion.

If people are actually considering ceasing their hobby altogether because a hole in a minifig helmet is 1 millimeter off, then I think we need to reevaluate our priorities.